Puppet users - Mar 2013 - Parametrized classes and scope dilemma

Hi.

I have a dilemma.

So far I''ve used this kind of syntax:

class foo (
  $var1 = $foo::params::var1
  $var2 = $foo::params::var2
  $var3 = $foo::params::var3
){
  ...
  some code
  ..
}

but, I''ve seen also this kind of usage:


class foo (
  $var1 = $::foo::params::var1
  $var2 = $::foo::params::var2
  $var3 = $::foo::params::var3
){
  ...
  some code
  ..
}


So, what''s up with forcing the root scope for the default values of
class params? Is this a better way of writing a module? What do you
think is more "by the book"?

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

On 2013-03-07 22:14, Jakov Sosic wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I have a dilemma.
>
> So far I''ve used this kind of syntax:
>
> class foo (
>    $var1 = $foo::params::var1
>    $var2 = $foo::params::var2
>    $var3 = $foo::params::var3
> ){
>    ...
>    some code
>    ..
> }
>
> but, I''ve seen also this kind of usage:
>
>
> class foo (
>    $var1 = $::foo::params::var1
>    $var2 = $::foo::params::var2
>    $var3 = $::foo::params::var3
> ){
>    ...
>    some code
>    ..
> }
>
>
> So, what''s up with forcing the root scope for the default values
of
> class params? Is this a better way of writing a module? What do you
> think is more "by the book"?
The latter is what you want to say. The former is a legitimate shortcut 
until you have a class foo::foo. Then you''re welcome to a world of
pain.




Best Regards, David

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

It''s defensive coding around a long-standing unwanted behavior of
Puppet.

See bug http://projects.puppetlabs.com/issues/2053

More information and explanation here: 
http://docs.puppetlabs.com/puppet/latest/reference/lang_namespaces.html#relative-name-lookup-and-incorrect-name-resolution

David''s comment is right in the general sense, but in the specific
sense,
you''d only run into a problem if you had both:

- class foo::params
- class foo::foo::params

...in which case you''d get the wrong one unless you forced top
namespace.
But since you''ll generally only have one params class per module,
you''re
generally fine. 

On Thursday, March 7, 2013 1:14:07 PM UTC-8, Jakov Sosic
wrote:
>
> Hi. 
>
> I have a dilemma. 
>
> So far I''ve used this kind of syntax: 
>
> class foo ( 
>   $var1 = $foo::params::var1 
>   $var2 = $foo::params::var2 
>   $var3 = $foo::params::var3 
> ){ 
>   ... 
>   some code 
>   .. 
> } 
>
> but, I''ve seen also this kind of usage: 
>
>
> class foo ( 
>   $var1 = $::foo::params::var1 
>   $var2 = $::foo::params::var2 
>   $var3 = $::foo::params::var3 
> ){ 
>   ... 
>   some code 
>   .. 
> } 
>
>
> So, what''s up with forcing the root scope for the default values
of
> class params? Is this a better way of writing a module? What do you 
> think is more "by the book"? 
>
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Puppet Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to puppet-users+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to puppet-users@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-users?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.